Editorial: District maps finally approved

It isn’t supposed to be this difficult, but it has become a decennial rite of torture.

At issue is the redrawing of Texas’ legislative and congressional boundaries.

The U.S. Constitution requires the states to redraw the lines after every census, which was completed in early 2011. Texas made out well in the new census, gaining four seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Why the gain? Our state’s population grew at a tremendous rate between 2000 and 2010, adding about 4 million residents.

Other states saw their population grow at slower rates, so they had to lose some seats to make up for the faster growth in Sun Belt states such as Texas.

But drawing the boundaries usually creates tremendous havoc in Texas, because we ask our state legislators to do it. And this year’s exercise has been painful in the extreme.

Legislators drew the maps, but they were challenged by minority groups that said they didn’t account for the big Hispanic population growth in South and Central Texas. The courts have been batting this issue around.

So now, a federal court has approved the latest incarnation of the districts. Both sides said they didn’t get all they wanted, or lose all they feared. A compromise appears to have been reached.

What’s the effect? The state’s primary elections are scheduled for May 29.

This issue should have been settled long ago.

County elections officials, candidates, political party officials and — most importantly — voters have needed to know when these contests will occur.

The issue for the Texas Panhandle isn’t as critical as it is for other regions of the state. The region is getting a newly redrawn House District 88 that runs from the Oklahoma border southwest to an area beyond Lubbock. But District 87 and District 86 remain more or less as they have been for the past decade. Senate District 31 would cover most of the Panhandle, while Senate District 28 would be pushed farther south.

So, let’s get this matter settled. Let’s have our primary elections, which will nominate candidates for public office.

And then perhaps we can charge the 2013 Legislature with finding a better — less partisan and divisive — way to redraw these boundaries in time for the next census.